Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Cinderella Post
From the Ashliman website, I read the Norwegian version of Cinderella, Katie Woodencloak. I found this version not as exciting as the Perrault or the Grimms version, despite the fact that there were some magical elements in the story. Although many of the versions are unrealistic, the magic within the stories is enjoyable. I found the magical elements in Katie Woodencloak unappealing, especially the three trolls in the forest that the talking bull has to fight; however, I do realize that trolls are a part of Norwegian culture. I also did not like the fact that the prince was so mean to Katie Woodencloak when she was in her wooden cloak and that despite this, she still went to see the prince in church those three times. The storyline with the dead bull was also left in the open; did he magically turn into the man who gave Katie the copper, silver, and gold kilts? Overall, I was not impressed.
Creepy Fairy Godmothers
I looked at the illustrations of Cinderella on the Sur La Lune website. After looking at many of the different drawings done to accompany Cinderella I noticed that there were many different depictions of the fairy godmother. Some of the illustrations showed the godmother to be rather evil looking, almost as if she appeared as a witch. But we all know that the fairy godmother is good and actually helps Cinderella so I thought it was interesting to portray her in this dark, ominous way. For example in Arthur Rackman’s drawing the godmother appears darkly cloaked and boney, almost as one would picture the witch in Hansel and Gretel to look like. She does not appear jolly and bright like the Disney fairy godmother. There is another illustration done by Paul Woodroffe which shows the fairy godmother with a black witch’s hat on. She is wearing a red cloak and a tight black dress. Her face is very pale and almost skeletal looking and she hovers creepily over Cinderella. She really does appear more like an evil sorcerer than a gift bearing godmother. I wondered why the illustrators chose to draw the godmother in this way. If I were a child reading these stories and viewing these pictures I would immediately associate the pictures of the godmothers as evil due to the way the illustrators drew them. Perhaps these artists were hinting at the moral that Perrault highlights at the end of his story, that beauty isn’t everything, but rather graciousness and a good heart. Although these fairy godmothers appear wicked, they have inner goodness and grant dear Cinderella’s wishes.
Assignment: 24 February 2009
Look through the sites below and choose either an illustration(s) or a version of the Cinderella story which we have not read for class and respond to it.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Walt, Prince of Fairy tales
I, along with Chester and sloanesc believe Zipes' thesis to be "The great "magic" of the Disney spell is that he animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen." (333)
Although Zipes' thesis may be true, I do not view Walt Disney in such a pessimistic light as Zipes seems to. If we take a pragmatic view on this, it is highly likely that Disney wanted to "transfix audiences" with his animations. In order to make more money, he would have wanted audiences to keep coming to the cinema to see his movies over and over again, and ways of doing this were to wow them with the filming techniques or to provide a happy feel-good movie. Disney did both of these things.
Since childhood I have loved the Disney movies (if you were interested, my favorites were the Lion King, Beauty and the Beast and the Sword in the Stone) and I still love them today, but that is part of the beauty of the Disney movie. They appeal to both adults and children. Children are amused by the talking animals, the beautiful princesses and of course the handsome prince who saves the fair maiden from the evil stepmother/sea monster/unwanted lover. At the same time, Disney appealed to adults by having a number of levels. For instance, it is only as you get older that you begin to understand all the humor in the movies. Also, a child would not get the reference to Hitler in the Lion King - as the hyenas march past Scar (during "Be Prepared") it is very reminiscent of the Nazis marching past Hitler at Nuremberg. Walt Disney was trying to appeal to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible. For instance, if the original ending of Snow White had appeared in the Disney movie with the evil stepmother being burnt to death by shoes provided for by Snow White and her new husband, children would be terrified, and parents would not take their children to see the movie. In the end no one would watch it and Walt Disney wanted his movies to be seen.
Many of the false promises and cutesy nature of the Disney movies are there simply to explain the fairy tale more thoroughly. It is very hard to explain the end of the Brothers Grimm's version of Snow White, where she wakes up in her coffin to find the Prince (who she has never seen before) sitting next to her, and falls immediately in love with him. In Disney's version, the Prince sees Snow White at the beginning of the film and they sing a love song together. Although this brings in a Prince Charming figure (which could be seen as a false promise) it better explains why Snow White agrees to marry him at the end.
If it was Disney's intention was to "divert... potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen," I do not believe this fact should be viewed cynically. Disney movies are loved worldwide by children and adults alike, providing happiness and laughter for all who watch them. It is true that his animations hold false promises; after all not every story ends with a Prince Charming and a happily ever after. However, as Zipes says, this is a part of their magic - they provide an escape from day to day life, where disasters happen, good people die and evil is not banished. In the Disney movies, we can live in a world where we know everything will turn out right in the end. Whatever motives he had, Disney rejuvenated the fairy tale, creating timeless classic after timeless classic, which live on in the hearts of many.
Although Zipes' thesis may be true, I do not view Walt Disney in such a pessimistic light as Zipes seems to. If we take a pragmatic view on this, it is highly likely that Disney wanted to "transfix audiences" with his animations. In order to make more money, he would have wanted audiences to keep coming to the cinema to see his movies over and over again, and ways of doing this were to wow them with the filming techniques or to provide a happy feel-good movie. Disney did both of these things.
Since childhood I have loved the Disney movies (if you were interested, my favorites were the Lion King, Beauty and the Beast and the Sword in the Stone) and I still love them today, but that is part of the beauty of the Disney movie. They appeal to both adults and children. Children are amused by the talking animals, the beautiful princesses and of course the handsome prince who saves the fair maiden from the evil stepmother/sea monster/unwanted lover. At the same time, Disney appealed to adults by having a number of levels. For instance, it is only as you get older that you begin to understand all the humor in the movies. Also, a child would not get the reference to Hitler in the Lion King - as the hyenas march past Scar (during "Be Prepared") it is very reminiscent of the Nazis marching past Hitler at Nuremberg. Walt Disney was trying to appeal to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible. For instance, if the original ending of Snow White had appeared in the Disney movie with the evil stepmother being burnt to death by shoes provided for by Snow White and her new husband, children would be terrified, and parents would not take their children to see the movie. In the end no one would watch it and Walt Disney wanted his movies to be seen.
Many of the false promises and cutesy nature of the Disney movies are there simply to explain the fairy tale more thoroughly. It is very hard to explain the end of the Brothers Grimm's version of Snow White, where she wakes up in her coffin to find the Prince (who she has never seen before) sitting next to her, and falls immediately in love with him. In Disney's version, the Prince sees Snow White at the beginning of the film and they sing a love song together. Although this brings in a Prince Charming figure (which could be seen as a false promise) it better explains why Snow White agrees to marry him at the end.
If it was Disney's intention was to "divert... potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen," I do not believe this fact should be viewed cynically. Disney movies are loved worldwide by children and adults alike, providing happiness and laughter for all who watch them. It is true that his animations hold false promises; after all not every story ends with a Prince Charming and a happily ever after. However, as Zipes says, this is a part of their magic - they provide an escape from day to day life, where disasters happen, good people die and evil is not banished. In the Disney movies, we can live in a world where we know everything will turn out right in the end. Whatever motives he had, Disney rejuvenated the fairy tale, creating timeless classic after timeless classic, which live on in the hearts of many.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Post #4
“The great ‘magic’ of the Disney spell is that he [Disney] animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen,” (Zipes, 333).
I disagree with Zipes’ thesis. Although I do believe that Disney created these animated fairy tales to help audiences get away from the struggles and banality of their everyday lives, I also believe that Disney tried to instill some hope to his viewers, not by simply “transfixing” them through his animation of “false promises,” but by helping them realize that everyone can achieve the “American” dream.
Disney himself was the epitome of “the American dream.” Growing up in a poor family with weak parental relations, he was destined to become nothing more than what he was born into. He, however, showed that with hard work and effort, time and patience, anyone who puts their mind to it can achieve what they want out of life. Although Disney’s films were based on fairy tales from lands far away, with the events depicted lacking realness in today’s society, I do not think that it was with “false promises” that Disney tried to show his interpretations of many known fairy tales.
The "magic" of Disney
I agree with Holly in that the lines she presented are very important to understanding Zipes’ argument about Disney. However, I think the main argument to the essay occurs two lines later: “The great “magic” of the Disney spell is that he animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen” (p. 333). While Zipes’ phrase “Disney was a radical filmmaker who changed our way of viewing fairy tales, and that his revolutionary technical means capitalized on American innocence and utopianism to reinforce the status quo” is very revealing, all of those statements are fairly quantifiable; there is much more of an argumentative edge in Zipes statements about the Disney magic.
If Zipes’ argument was not persuasive enough the first time around, I doubt that my summery is going to change your mind. However, I think there are several parts of his essay that support his definition of Disney magic, so that overall his essay is convincing of his point. He starts with a fairly detailed history of the fairy tale genre and how the oral and literary traditions interacted for so long. The point of this history is to show “the literary fairy tale’s ascent corresponded to violent and progressive shifts in society and celebrated individualism, subjectivity, and reflection” (341). But even with the societal shifts, fairy tales continued to play an important role, be it for adult entertainment or to teach morals. However, fairy tale film had a very different aim: “It did not matter what story was projected just as long as the images astounded the audience, captured its imagination for a short period of time, and left the people laughing or staring in wonderment” (342). Animated fairy tales in general have a very different and less laudable focus. Zipes also argues that “Disney sought to replace all versions with his animated version and that his cartoon is astonishingly autobiographical” (343). Pushing for the audience to only remember his version and using his animation to astound the audience is half way towards arguing his main thesis. Zipes has shown that Disney is using his magic to transfix audiences through the images he cast on the screen, the only question remains, what is he transfixing the audience to?
That question is answered in the text as well, supporting his thesis. Two major points stand out arguing this point: the first is Snow White’s historical context. It came out during the Great Depression, and it “was to bring together all the personal strands of Disney’s own story with the destinies of desperate Americans who sought hope and solidarity in their fight for survival during the Depression of the 1930s” (346). So there is a definite utopian component in the masses. Disney’s own story was a tale of success, but projecting that on the screen even though it was the story of a small minority could give the masses false hope. The final point that shows how Disney only aimed to divert the masses with false promises is how Disney acted once he was firmly in power. “The manner in which he copied the musical plays and films of his time, and his close adaptation of fairy tales with patriarchal codes, indicate that all the technical experiments would not be used to foster social change in America but to keep power in the hands of the individuals like himself” (351). Disney was willing to use his entrancing art form to chain the masses. With all these facts in mind, Zipes’ argument about Disney’s magic seems much more convincing.
Song of the blog: “I kissed a girl” by Katy Perry.
If Zipes’ argument was not persuasive enough the first time around, I doubt that my summery is going to change your mind. However, I think there are several parts of his essay that support his definition of Disney magic, so that overall his essay is convincing of his point. He starts with a fairly detailed history of the fairy tale genre and how the oral and literary traditions interacted for so long. The point of this history is to show “the literary fairy tale’s ascent corresponded to violent and progressive shifts in society and celebrated individualism, subjectivity, and reflection” (341). But even with the societal shifts, fairy tales continued to play an important role, be it for adult entertainment or to teach morals. However, fairy tale film had a very different aim: “It did not matter what story was projected just as long as the images astounded the audience, captured its imagination for a short period of time, and left the people laughing or staring in wonderment” (342). Animated fairy tales in general have a very different and less laudable focus. Zipes also argues that “Disney sought to replace all versions with his animated version and that his cartoon is astonishingly autobiographical” (343). Pushing for the audience to only remember his version and using his animation to astound the audience is half way towards arguing his main thesis. Zipes has shown that Disney is using his magic to transfix audiences through the images he cast on the screen, the only question remains, what is he transfixing the audience to?
That question is answered in the text as well, supporting his thesis. Two major points stand out arguing this point: the first is Snow White’s historical context. It came out during the Great Depression, and it “was to bring together all the personal strands of Disney’s own story with the destinies of desperate Americans who sought hope and solidarity in their fight for survival during the Depression of the 1930s” (346). So there is a definite utopian component in the masses. Disney’s own story was a tale of success, but projecting that on the screen even though it was the story of a small minority could give the masses false hope. The final point that shows how Disney only aimed to divert the masses with false promises is how Disney acted once he was firmly in power. “The manner in which he copied the musical plays and films of his time, and his close adaptation of fairy tales with patriarchal codes, indicate that all the technical experiments would not be used to foster social change in America but to keep power in the hands of the individuals like himself” (351). Disney was willing to use his entrancing art form to chain the masses. With all these facts in mind, Zipes’ argument about Disney’s magic seems much more convincing.
Song of the blog: “I kissed a girl” by Katy Perry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
